No independent exploring

[nosapphire]

45 minutes ago, Windsurfboy said:

It's very interesting,  this thread started 18 days ago, at the start of cruises on which covid became almost rampant with lockdowns and lots of people in quarantine and being marched of to hotel quarantine. Jump forward 2 and1/2 weeks and ighten reports only 2 positive cases and 2 days of no cases. 

 

Great news , but  Saga's covid protocols were exactly same for both sets of cruises. So you can't argue it's the strict rules that have resulted in lower covid in latest cruises because the same rules didn't work in earlier cruises.

 

 if Saga uses this drop as evidence that the rules and especially no independent excursions at ports work and  are thus being extended into May , they have it wrong

Somewhere not too far back there was a post where somebody received a reply from Saga cruise CEO saying that as covid cases were dropping, it meant the system of only going ashore on included excursions was working.

I am too lazy to search for the post, and cannot recall whether it was on SoA or SoD - but I do recall that even at the time the post made no sense to me, and even less sense when reading about free time allowed on the excursions.

It is extremely good news that this cruise has very low cases, just (like you) hope that somebody at Saga does not latch on to the excursion scenario as being the reason.

ADDED: Unless the reason for cases previously being so high can be pinpointed,nobody can say with any confidence why they are now so low.

Looking at the photos (especially of the Brittania lounge) submitted by Igten, I wonder if the passenger count on this cruise is substantially lower than the other cruises  which would to me be a good indicator of the reason for a low covid count.

Edited April 17, 2022 by nosapphire
add

[Vivaldi]

1 hour ago, nosapphire said:

I wonder if the passenger count on this cruise is substantially lower than the other cruises

Ighten did say in his excellent blog that the ship was at 70 - 75% capacity, so that could have a fair impact on the number of people testing positive. It would be interesting to know how many guests were on the ship in earlier cruises. 

[LondonLad60]

29 minutes ago, Vivaldi said:

Ighten did say in his excellent blog that the ship was at 70 - 75% capacity, so that could have a fair impact on the number of people testing positive. It would be interesting to know how many guests were on the ship in earlier cruises. 

On SoD's March 13th to 31st Med cruise I was told that there were 720-726 passengers - the number varied as entertainers got on and off. The first covid cases were reported on March 21st - nine days into the cruise. The captain said that one or two cases had probably slipped through the testing net at Southampton - if that was the case, I'd have thought the first cases would have been picked up sooner. We had visited four ports by the 21st, so I'm more inclined to think that it was brought on by someone who had been ashore in one of the ports.

 

Bob

[Windsurfboy]

1 hour ago, LondonLad60 said:

On SoD's March 13th to 31st Med cruise I was told that there were 720-726 passengers - the number varied as entertainers got on and off. The first covid cases were reported on March 21st - nine days into the cruise. The captain said that one or two cases had probably slipped through the testing net at Southampton - if that was the case, I'd have thought the first cases would have been picked up sooner. We had visited four ports by the 21st, so I'm more inclined to think that it was brought on by someone who had been ashore in one of the ports.

 

Bob

 I understand where you're  coming from, that these cases must have been brought  on board later. Certainly anyone coming on at UK would have shown positive by then. Unless the 9 day case was a secondary infection from a asymptomatic UK boarder. 

 

But the main point is that your cruise which allowed independent excursions at ports,  did not experience the rampant covid of the subsequent cruises , and they had stopped independent excursions, but to no effect.

[Denarius]

6 hours ago, Windsurfboy said:

 I understand where you're  coming from, that these cases must have been brought  on board later. Certainly anyone coming on at UK would have shown positive by then. Unless the 9 day case was a secondary infection from a asymptomatic UK boarder. 

 

But the main point is that your cruise which allowed independent excursions at ports,  did not experience the rampant covid of the subsequent cruises , and they had stopped independent excursions, but to no effect.

I was on the recent SofA Canary Island cruise. We had less than a dozen cases of covid identified during the cruise. The SofD cruise to the Med which sailed at the same time however, had several times as many, resulting in the ship being refused entry to most of the ports on her itinerary. Yet both ships operated exactly the same protocols including no indepenent shore trips.

[LondonLad60]

9 hours ago, Denarius said:

I was on the recent SofA Canary Island cruise. We had less than a dozen cases of covid identified during the cruise. The SofD cruise to the Med which sailed at the same time however, had several times as many, resulting in the ship being refused entry to most of the ports on her itinerary. Yet both ships operated exactly the same protocols including no indepenent shore trips.

On the SoD cruise, cases peaked at 147 on March 29th. The ship was only refused entry into one port, which was Cadiz - the last port on the itinerary. We were allowed to explore independently at all other ports, except (I think) the port in Tunisia - I forget its name.

[LondonLad60]

3 hours ago, LondonLad60 said:

On the SoD cruise, cases peaked at 147 on March 29th. The ship was only refused entry into one port, which was Cadiz - the last port on the itinerary. We were allowed to explore independently at all other ports, except (I think) the port in Tunisia - I forget its name.

My apologies. I was referring to the SoD Med cruise prior to the one Denarius mentioned. Doh!

[ighten]

Quick update after 2 days of 100% pass rate staff and pax we had 2 pax yesterday.

 

It was however then mentioned that tonight would be the last night of testing.

 

Hard to find any logic then in why we can't do our own thing as yet again today some guests decided the hike was a little tougher than they thought so we're just allowed to wander back to the town to find a coffee bar.

 

Ironically from tomorrow Spain relaxes all mask rules. TBF the trips on this cruise at the moment feel less restricted than the trips we had on Cunard in Jan as masks were mandatory even outside at all time. Here for most people it's masks off as soon as you leave the ship or bus (or go inside a building) which is probably a good thing as it has been warm at times.

[Vivaldi]

23 hours ago, Windsurfboy said:

But the main point is that your cruise which allowed independent excursions at ports,  did not experience the rampant covid of the subsequent cruises , and they had stopped independent excursions, but to no effect.

 

I wonder if it is all a question of levels of risk. As far as the possibility of catching covid ashore and bringing it on to the ship is concerned, if passengers are only allowed to go on organised excursions and are given no opportunity to be in contact with anyone ashore, the risk level will be low. The highest risk level will occur when passengers are allowed to go ashore independently. Insisting that passengers go on organised excursions, but allowed a limited amount of free time for them to do as they wish, would fall between these two risk levels. 

 

Consequently, it is possible that on one cruise there are still problems even when independent trips ashore are prohibited, and on another there are no cases even when free movement ashore is allowed. Some of that is just down to bad luck. How you quantify the various risk levels and so decide the best course of action is a very important and difficult question to answer. I doubt that Saga, or any cruise line, has enough facts to give a definitive answer, if an answer is ever possible.

[Windsurfboy]

1 hour ago, Vivaldi said:

 

I wonder if it is all a question of levels of risk. As far as the possibility of catching covid ashore and bringing it on to the ship is concerned, if passengers are only allowed to go on organised excursions and are given no opportunity to be in contact with anyone ashore, the risk level will be low. The highest risk level will occur when passengers are allowed to go ashore independently. Insisting that passengers go on organised excursions, but allowed a limited amount of free time for them to do as they wish, would fall between these two risk levels. 

 

Consequently, it is possible that on one cruise there are still problems even when independent trips ashore are prohibited, and on another there are no cases even when free movement ashore is allowed. Some of that is just down to bad luck. How you quantify the various risk levels and so decide the best course of action is a very important and difficult question to answer. I doubt that Saga, or any cruise line, has enough facts to give a definitive answer, if an answer is ever possible.

 

Clearly every restriction reduces the risk a little or a lot that is the question ,  but you must balance it against the reduced enjoyment.  Everyone who has booked on a cruise has accepted there is more risk than staying at home. 

 

Banning independent excursions at ports,  clearly did not stop covid,  it may have had a small effect in reducing risk. However for many people it has a large impact on enjoyment, and who given the choice (and a full refund) would have cancelled. 

 

Saga must have thought banning independent excursions would significantly reduce the risk. Other cruise lines must have thought it would not have as  significant an effect because they did not do it . At the time no one could say for certain who was right. However now after the event the evidence that it has a significant impact on risk is very questionable . However that it has had a significant impact on enjoyment for some is inarguably true. 

 

 

[ighten]

Quick update from the captain here on SoA 

Another all clear day for pax and crew and no more testing. So that basically works out that half the cruise days we have tested and caught I think 6 pax. 2 of which were actually the results of failing Southampton pcr test. 

[Vivaldi]

29 minutes ago, Windsurfboy said:

Banning independent excursions at ports,  clearly did not stop covid,  it may have had a small effect in reducing risk. However for many people it has a large impact on enjoyment, and who given the choice (and a full refund) would have cancelled

 

One of the points I intended to make was that it is very difficult to quantify any reduction in risk, even more so when the level of risk can vary from country to country and port to port. 

 

I fully agree with what you have said about the impact on enjoyment, and believe that passengers should have been told before sailing that independent trips were to be banned, and should have had the option of cancelling with a full refund. Not all would have cancelled. We have only ever taken one organised excursion on a cruise, and vastly prefer to wander around on our own ashore. However an even greater impact on our enjoyment would be the thought that we might be offloaded in an overseas port, put in a quarantine hotel and have to fly home, or (to a lesser extent) that we might be confined to our cabin for days on end. If (and I accept that it is a big "if") it helped to avoid these possibilities, we'd accept the ban on independent excursions, but know that other people have different and equally valid views.

 

The main point I'd make is that people should have the choice, and that means that Saga must let people know before their cruise takes place and must allow them to cancel without penalty if they feel that the regime adopted for onshore visits would seriously impair their enjoyment of their cruise. 

[Windsurfboy]

Firstly  I  agree with all you say, especially about being put into quarantine in a hotel. This risk is not made clear. Reading Saga's covid page , it reads as if you would only be taken off the ship for medical reasons to go into hospital if you were really  sick,  not sent to hotel  quarantine to get the covid numbers down. So if it wasn't for this thread, we would not know that's a risk we would all be taking.  There are no government regulations anymore to disembark covid positives, it's a Saga decision. 

 

Being quarantined in our cabin is a risk we all accept.

 

I'm in favour of all restrictions that work. To find out you must give them a go.  Of course also give people a choice of a refund if it would not be the cruise they booked.

 

However once they've been tested , if there is no evidence that they work,  then don't hang onto them just because they should work in theory.  That's the opposite of a scientific approach. They've tested no independent excursions at ports,  the evidence to continue with them is not there, even if in theory it looks like it should work.

[Vivaldi]

16 hours ago, Windsurfboy said:

However once they've been tested , if there is no evidence that they work,  then don't hang onto them just because they should work in theory.  That's the opposite of a scientific approach. They've tested no independent excursions at ports,  the evidence to continue with them is not there, even if in theory it looks like it should work.

 

I think our only difference lies in what we consider constitutes evidence, and how risk is evaluated. If we are looking at the level of risk but only taking into account the outcomes which have been observed, then the sample size (the number of cruises involved) is so small that, statistically speaking, the margin of error is vast. As a result, it would be difficult to reach any firm conclusion. Put another way, although the evidence to continue with restrictions is not there, neither is the evidence to drop restrictions. 

 

Basically, whichever option Saga takes, it can't win. All Saga can do is to give people a proper choice by informing them before their cruise whether or not independent shore trips will be allowed. How I miss the good old (pre-covid) days!

[krrgolf]

@Vivaldi I agree with you entirely. How simple the pre Covid days were…… you looked….. you booked….. you sailed! None of this paperwork, testing, and trying to keep Covid free for Sunday (counting the days).

 

[Windsurfboy]

4 hours ago, Vivaldi said:

 

Basically, whichever option Saga takes, it can't win. All Saga can do is to give people a proper choice by informing them before their cruise whether or not independent shore trips will be allowed. How I miss the good old (pre-covid) days!

 

I agree you the evidence either way to keep or remove restrictions is weak and unlikely to ever be strong. I suppose it's a matter of philosophy.  Either "can't prove they dont work" and safety is paramount so keep restrictions ad infinitum . Or " No proof they work " so giving people the cruise experience they booked is paramount . Just depends which camp you are in.

 

However while Saga takes a very different stance to all the other cruise lines I think the onus is on Saga to prove why it is being more restrictive than the rest of the industry.  Yes Saga has a slightly older clientele,  but I  say 80% of other UK cruise lines clientele are of a similar  "vunerable " age. 

 

If Saga simply kept it's restrictions in-line with the industry no one could argue, or blame it for being lax, it can't loose that way. 

[stephenSJ]

I posted here earlier about the S o D 31st march to 15th april as it happened.

If you look back at those posts you see on the first day there were 6 hours of lock downs and by the 2nd  day we had already been refused entry to lisbon owing to numbers in isolation

Capt never gave figures for numbers in isolation but from the number of crew who disappeared on the 1st and 2nd day and the reductions in service it was on the ship at start of cruise - it was in the crew when we sailed carried over from previous cruise.. Those servicing cabins and feeding us would have passed it to the recently boarded pax.

No restrictions on independent tours or other gambits was ever going to change the outcome. S o D  was doomed as it sailed on that occasion.. 

 

[Windsurfboy]

28 minutes ago, stephenSJ said:

 

Capt never gave figures for numbers in isolation but from the number of crew who disappeared on the 1st and 2nd day and the reductions in service it was on the ship at start of cruise - it was in the crew when we sailed carried over from previous cruise.. Those servicing cabins and feeding us would have passed it to the recently boarded pax.

No restrictions on independent tours or other gambits was ever going to change the outcome. S o D  was doomed as it sailed on that occasion.. 

 

 

Sounds far more plausible explanation,  than that given by Saga that it was all due to naughty passengers not wearing masks. No cruise line will ever admit crew were main vector for covid. Given proximity in which crew live it's no wonder it spreads fast in crew quarters.

 

The good news is given speed it spread through crew, vast majority will have now had it, and hence low case rates in current cruises. Very little taken on board by passengers, either in UK or at ports.

[ighten]

It does have to be said though there are other cruise lines out there with other utterly bizarre rules. Granted non take away this major key element of indy shore visits  but the most ludicrous I have come across is Cunards mask policy on our Jan/Feb trip. 

 

You can sit at a table with strangers in the Queens room and socialize and drink but they actually chase people for dancing if not wearing a mask even  with there partner and more than likely in a ballroom hold.

Yet 10 minutes earlier they will set up the same entire room into packed elbow to elbow cabaret seating for a comedian to take the stage in the same room but because everyone has a drink no mask required whilst everyone's rolling on the floor in fits of laughter. 

 

 

[Denarius]

4 hours ago, Windsurfboy said:

 

I agree you the evidence either way to keep or remove restrictions is weak and unlikely to ever be strong. I suppose it's a matter of philosophy.  Either "can't prove they dont work" and safety is paramount so keep restrictions ad infinitum . Or " No proof they work " so giving people the cruise experience they booked is paramount . Just depends which camp you are in.

 

However while Saga takes a very different stance to all the other cruise lines I think the onus is on Saga to prove why it is being more restrictive than the rest of the industry.  Yes Saga has a slightly older clientele,  but I  say 80% of other UK cruise lines clientele are of a similar  "vunerable " age. 

 

If Saga simply kept it's restrictions in-line with the industry no one could argue, or blame it for being lax, it can't loose that way. 

Throughout the pandemic, Saga have been in the vanguard as regards caution. The first cruise line to insist on vaccination, the first to insist on boosters ... Invariably the other lines followed their lead - until now. I suspect that Saga believed that they would and were left out on a limb when they didn't. So now they have the choice of admitting they overeacted and reversing the decision to come back into line with the rest, or continuing to plough their lone furrow in the knowledge that it may well hurt bookings. As they say, between a rock and a hard place. What will they do? I suspect that they will run with it for a few weeks so as not to lose face, then come back into line justifying it by (hopefully) falling UK infections. Watch this space!

[krrgolf]

Hi all,

 

I have been tracking the available cabins since 27th March for the SoA cruise this Sunday, 24th. Makes interesting reading….

 

Taking the Standard Twin as an example, on 27th March there were 48 available, following the ‘ no independent shore excursion’ letter on 30th March, within a week the 48 had become 72 then rose to 88 by 10th April.

 

I asked Saga why…… various reasons…. Some cancelled, some moved to later cruise, some were cancelled by Saga themselves if pax didn’t have Covid cover, some pax had contracted Covid and didn’t want to cruise now so deferred etc.

 

Last week the 88 dropped back to 70 - I think due to Saga holding more cabins back as possible isolation cabins.

 

This morning the 70 is now 78 - I suspect due to pax having to cancel if they have caught Covid within the 14 days before travel. With Easter just gone and kids and grandkids visiting - no great surprise the numbers have gone up again and I expect will continue to do so.

 

The total number of cabins available - excluding those kept back by Saga as isolation, I’m guessing at least 15, the total is 112 (see photo from website). Allowing for some singletons, I’m estimating around a 200 pax drop from capacity of 987 - so the cruise is likely to be running at around 80% full. 
 

I doubt many will book now so likely that the total number of pax on board will ease down further……. More positive Covid tests between now and Sunday and I guess some will fall at the final hurdle in Southampton.

 

For those going (really hoping we make it) there will be more space on board!

 

 

[Vivaldi]

7 hours ago, krrgolf said:

For those going (really hoping we make it) there will be more space on board!

 

We'll keep our fingers crossed for you! In a post dated April 10 above, 111222333 reported Nigel Blanks as saying that he was confident that the no independent exploring policy would be lifted by the end of April. If that proves to be the case, then most of your cruise will be free from this restriction, which would be very welcome news.

 

Everyone posting here will be wishing you a thoroughly enjoyable trip. If you are able to give us an occasional update on how it is going, we'd be delighted to read it.

[krrgolf]

Thx for the reply.

 

Out of interest, there was another Saga cruise on the SoD departing 27th April not sure where it was heading, it may have been called Baltic Ensemble. It is no longer showing on ‘cruises departing in April 22’ - has it been cancelled or maybe it’s now fully booked?

[LandC]

I searched using cruise code SD069. Baltic Ensemble 27th April departure is still showing. It says call for latest availability.  As you say may be fully booked, or perhaps  Saga is about to change the itinerary, which includes Helsinki, Tallinn and Kotka, but no Russian ports.  St Petersburg was on the original itinerary but has now been removed.

Edited April 21, 2022 by LandC
Addition

[ighten]

All restrictions lifted on soa .. free to go ashore